Opinion
Case No. CR-3-05-185.
February 21, 2006
ENTRY AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR REASONABLE BOND, FILED JANUARY 10, 2006
This matter comes before the Court pursuant to Defendant's Motion for Reasonable Bond and Bond Hearing (Doc. #14). Pursuant to said Motion, the Court conducted a bond hearing on February 7, 2006 at 4:00 PM.
Said Motion requests the Court to review the Order of Detention previously issued by the Magistrate Judge in this case and amend such order setting a reasonable bond.
Under 18 U.S.C. Section 3145(b), if a person is ordered detained by a magistrate judge, that person may file, with the Court, a motion for revocation or amendment of the order.
In this case, the Defendant requests the Court set a "reasonable bond" allowing him to be released while this matter is pending. Defendant further states that if he is released he can and would stay with Joseph E. Jones, Sr. a friend of the family.
Under 18 U.S.C. Section 3142(f), the Court must make a determination whether any condition or combination of conditions would reasonably assure the appearance of the Defendant as required and the safety of any other person and the community. In making this determination, the Court has considered the factors enumerated under 18 U.S.C. Section 3142(g) including the nature and circumstances of the offense charged as well as the Defendant's history and characteristics.
This Defendant has accumulated a lengthy criminal history, including incarceration, extending back into the 1980's. Defendant's history also reflects his failure to comply with court imposed supervision in the past including the fact that he was on parole at the time of this alleged instant offense.
Although the Court has considered the offer of a residence by Joseph E. Jones, Sr., Mr. Jones' testimony indicated that he obviously had not been informed of the Defendant's record. Regardless, the Court does not find that the availability of a residence alone would outweigh the Court's concern in weighing the 18 U.S.C. Section 3142(g) factors.
This Court does not find after a review of the case that there is a condition or combination of conditions that would reasonably assure the appearance of Defendant as required and the safety of any other person and the community.
Defendant's Motion is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.